[PATCH 0/2] Final series to make Arm MISRA allcode green

[PATCH 0/2] Final series to make Arm MISRA allcode green

[Michal Orzel]

No more regressions for clean guidelines:
https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/morzel/xen/-/pipelines/2433943072

Michal Orzel (2):
  iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing
  iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing

 xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
 xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c       | 7 +++----
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

-- 
2.43.0

[PATCH 1/2] iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing

[Michal Orzel]

Rename 'pdev' to 'pci_dev' in the dev_print_pci() macro to avoid
shadowing local 'pdev' variables at call sites.

Remove the unused 'ret' declaration from arm_smmu_dt_add_device_generic()
where the function-scope 'ret' is sufficient.

Fix shadowing of 'domain' in arm_smmu_assign_dev() by removing the
inner-scope redeclaration, using the function-scope variable instead.

This fixes MISRA C R5.3.

Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@amd.com>
---
 xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c | 7 +++----
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
index 22d306d0cb80..d63c9015510e 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
@@ -130,8 +130,8 @@ typedef enum irqreturn irqreturn_t;
         printk(lvl "smmu: %s: " fmt, dev_name((dev)), ## __VA_ARGS__);  \
     else                                                                \
     {                                                                   \
-        struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_to_pci((dev));                       \
-        printk(lvl "smmu: %pp: " fmt, &pdev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);     \
+        struct pci_dev *pci_dev = dev_to_pci((dev));                    \
+        printk(lvl "smmu: %pp: " fmt, &pci_dev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);  \
     }                                                                   \
 })
 #endif
@@ -927,7 +927,6 @@ static int arm_smmu_dt_add_device_generic(u8 devfn, struct device *dev)
 	if ( dev_is_pci(dev) )
 	{
 		struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_to_pci(dev);
-		int ret;
 
 		/* Ignore calls for phantom functions */
 		if ( devfn != pdev->devfn )
@@ -2788,7 +2787,7 @@ static int arm_smmu_assign_dev(struct domain *d, u8 devfn,
 		/* dom_io is used as a sentinel for quarantined devices */
 		if ( d == dom_io )
 		{
-			struct iommu_domain *domain = dev_iommu_domain(dev);
+			domain = dev_iommu_domain(dev);
 			if ( !iommu_quarantine )
 				return 0;
 
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH 1/2] iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Tue, 7 Apr 2026, Michal Orzel wrote:
> Rename 'pdev' to 'pci_dev' in the dev_print_pci() macro to avoid
> shadowing local 'pdev' variables at call sites.
> 
> Remove the unused 'ret' declaration from arm_smmu_dt_add_device_generic()
> where the function-scope 'ret' is sufficient.
> 
> Fix shadowing of 'domain' in arm_smmu_assign_dev() by removing the
> inner-scope redeclaration, using the function-scope variable instead.
> 
> This fixes MISRA C R5.3.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@amd.com>

Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>


> ---
>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c | 7 +++----
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
> index 22d306d0cb80..d63c9015510e 100644
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
> @@ -130,8 +130,8 @@ typedef enum irqreturn irqreturn_t;
>          printk(lvl "smmu: %s: " fmt, dev_name((dev)), ## __VA_ARGS__);  \
>      else                                                                \
>      {                                                                   \
> -        struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_to_pci((dev));                       \
> -        printk(lvl "smmu: %pp: " fmt, &pdev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);     \
> +        struct pci_dev *pci_dev = dev_to_pci((dev));                    \
> +        printk(lvl "smmu: %pp: " fmt, &pci_dev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);  \
>      }                                                                   \
>  })
>  #endif
> @@ -927,7 +927,6 @@ static int arm_smmu_dt_add_device_generic(u8 devfn, struct device *dev)
>  	if ( dev_is_pci(dev) )
>  	{
>  		struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_to_pci(dev);
> -		int ret;
>  
>  		/* Ignore calls for phantom functions */
>  		if ( devfn != pdev->devfn )
> @@ -2788,7 +2787,7 @@ static int arm_smmu_assign_dev(struct domain *d, u8 devfn,
>  		/* dom_io is used as a sentinel for quarantined devices */
>  		if ( d == dom_io )
>  		{
> -			struct iommu_domain *domain = dev_iommu_domain(dev);
> +			domain = dev_iommu_domain(dev);
>  			if ( !iommu_quarantine )
>  				return 0;
>  
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

[PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing

[Michal Orzel]

Rename 'pdev' to 'pci_dev' in the dev_print_pci() macro to avoid
shadowing local 'pdev' variables at call sites.

Remove the unused 'ret' declaration from ipmmu_assign_device() where
the function-scope 'ret' is sufficient.

This fixes MISRA C R5.3.

Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@amd.com>
---
 xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c
index ea9fa9ddf3ce..fa9ab9cb1330 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c
@@ -65,8 +65,8 @@
         printk(lvl "ipmmu: %s: " fmt, dev_name((dev)), ## __VA_ARGS__);  \
     else                                                                \
     {                                                                   \
-        struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_to_pci((dev));                       \
-        printk(lvl "ipmmu: %pp: " fmt, &pdev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);     \
+        struct pci_dev *pci_dev = dev_to_pci((dev));                       \
+        printk(lvl "ipmmu: %pp: " fmt, &pci_dev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);     \
     }                                                                   \
 })
 #endif
@@ -1171,8 +1171,6 @@ static int ipmmu_assign_device(struct domain *d, u8 devfn, struct device *dev,
         /* dom_io is used as a sentinel for quarantined devices */
         if ( d == dom_io )
         {
-            int ret;
-
             /*
              * Try to de-assign: do not return error if it was already
              * de-assigned.
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing

[Oleksandr Tyshchenko]

On 4/7/26 13:34, Michal Orzel wrote:

Hello Michal

> Rename 'pdev' to 'pci_dev' in the dev_print_pci() macro to avoid

NIT: The macro is named dev_print, not dev_print_pci.

> shadowing local 'pdev' variables at call sites.
> 
> Remove the unused 'ret' declaration from ipmmu_assign_device() where
> the function-scope 'ret' is sufficient.
> 
> This fixes MISRA C R5.3.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@amd.com>

Reviewed-by: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com>

> ---
>   xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c
> index ea9fa9ddf3ce..fa9ab9cb1330 100644
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c
> @@ -65,8 +65,8 @@
>           printk(lvl "ipmmu: %s: " fmt, dev_name((dev)), ## __VA_ARGS__);  \
>       else                                                                \
>       {                                                                   \
> -        struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_to_pci((dev));                       \
> -        printk(lvl "ipmmu: %pp: " fmt, &pdev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);     \
> +        struct pci_dev *pci_dev = dev_to_pci((dev));                       \
> +        printk(lvl "ipmmu: %pp: " fmt, &pci_dev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);     \
>       }                                                                   \
>   })
>   #endif
> @@ -1171,8 +1171,6 @@ static int ipmmu_assign_device(struct domain *d, u8 devfn, struct device *dev,
>           /* dom_io is used as a sentinel for quarantined devices */
>           if ( d == dom_io )
>           {
> -            int ret;
> -
>               /*
>                * Try to de-assign: do not return error if it was already
>                * de-assigned.

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Tue, 7 Apr 2026, Michal Orzel wrote:
> Rename 'pdev' to 'pci_dev' in the dev_print_pci() macro to avoid
> shadowing local 'pdev' variables at call sites.
> 
> Remove the unused 'ret' declaration from ipmmu_assign_device() where
> the function-scope 'ret' is sufficient.
> 
> This fixes MISRA C R5.3.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@amd.com>

Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>


> ---
>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c
> index ea9fa9ddf3ce..fa9ab9cb1330 100644
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c
> @@ -65,8 +65,8 @@
>          printk(lvl "ipmmu: %s: " fmt, dev_name((dev)), ## __VA_ARGS__);  \
>      else                                                                \
>      {                                                                   \
> -        struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_to_pci((dev));                       \
> -        printk(lvl "ipmmu: %pp: " fmt, &pdev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);     \
> +        struct pci_dev *pci_dev = dev_to_pci((dev));                       \
> +        printk(lvl "ipmmu: %pp: " fmt, &pci_dev->sbdf, ## __VA_ARGS__);     \
>      }                                                                   \
>  })
>  #endif
> @@ -1171,8 +1171,6 @@ static int ipmmu_assign_device(struct domain *d, u8 devfn, struct device *dev,
>          /* dom_io is used as a sentinel for quarantined devices */
>          if ( d == dom_io )
>          {
> -            int ret;
> -
>              /*
>               * Try to de-assign: do not return error if it was already
>               * de-assigned.
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Final series to make Arm MISRA allcode green

[Andrew Cooper]

On 07/04/2026 11:34 am, Michal Orzel wrote:
> No more regressions for clean guidelines:
> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/morzel/xen/-/pipelines/2433943072
>
> Michal Orzel (2):
>   iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing
>   iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing
>
>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c       | 7 +++----
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

If all the violations are fixed, should this test be made blocking?

~Andrew

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Final series to make Arm MISRA allcode green

[Nicola Vetrini]

On 2026-04-08 11:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 07/04/2026 11:34 am, Michal Orzel wrote:
>> No more regressions for clean guidelines:
>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/morzel/xen/-/pipelines/2433943072
>> 
>> Michal Orzel (2):
>>   iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing
>>   iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing
>> 
>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c       | 7 +++----
>>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> If all the violations are fixed, should this test be made blocking?
> 
> ~Andrew

Only if they are also clean on x86; otherwise an arm-specific list of 
clean rules should be made (probably better). @Michal what do you 
prefer?

-- 
Nicola Vetrini, B.Sc.
Software Engineer
BUGSENG (https://bugseng.com)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicola-vetrini-a42471253

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Final series to make Arm MISRA allcode green

[Andrew Cooper]

On 08/04/2026 10:46 am, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 2026-04-08 11:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 07/04/2026 11:34 am, Michal Orzel wrote:
>>> No more regressions for clean guidelines:
>>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/morzel/xen/-/pipelines/2433943072
>>>
>>> Michal Orzel (2):
>>>   iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing
>>>   iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing
>>>
>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c       | 7 +++----
>>>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> If all the violations are fixed, should this test be made blocking?
>>
>> ~Andrew
>
> Only if they are also clean on x86; otherwise an arm-specific list of
> clean rules should be made (probably better). @Michal what do you prefer?
>

All I'm suggesting is this:

xen.git/xen$ git diff
diff --git a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
index 4e9af9d60224..f01798c5dee6 100644
--- a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
+++ b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
@@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ eclair-ARM64-allcode:
       CONFIG_STACK_PROTECTOR=y
       CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED=y
       CONFIG_VM_EVENT=y
-  allow_failure: true
+  allow_failure: false
 
 eclair-ARM64-testing:
   extends: eclair-ARM64-allcode


so regressions become blocking.

~Andrew

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Final series to make Arm MISRA allcode green

[Nicola Vetrini]

On 2026-04-08 11:51, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 08/04/2026 10:46 am, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>> On 2026-04-08 11:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 07/04/2026 11:34 am, Michal Orzel wrote:
>>>> No more regressions for clean guidelines:
>>>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/morzel/xen/-/pipelines/2433943072
>>>> 
>>>> Michal Orzel (2):
>>>>   iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing
>>>>   iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing
>>>> 
>>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
>>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c       | 7 +++----
>>>>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>> 
>>> If all the violations are fixed, should this test be made blocking?
>>> 
>>> ~Andrew
>> 
>> Only if they are also clean on x86; otherwise an arm-specific list of
>> clean rules should be made (probably better). @Michal what do you 
>> prefer?
>> 
> 
> All I'm suggesting is this:
> 
> xen.git/xen$ git diff
> diff --git a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml 
> b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
> index 4e9af9d60224..f01798c5dee6 100644
> --- a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
> +++ b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ eclair-ARM64-allcode:
>        CONFIG_STACK_PROTECTOR=y
>        CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED=y
>        CONFIG_VM_EVENT=y
> -  allow_failure: true
> +  allow_failure: false
>  
>  eclair-ARM64-testing:
>    extends: eclair-ARM64-allcode
> 
> 
> so regressions become blocking.
> 
> ~Andrew

Ah, yes, indeed. I didn't look at the patches but given the diff it 
makes sense

-- 
Nicola Vetrini, B.Sc.
Software Engineer
BUGSENG (https://bugseng.com)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicola-vetrini-a42471253

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Final series to make Arm MISRA allcode green

[Orzel, Michal]

On 08/04/2026 12:21, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 2026-04-08 11:51, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 08/04/2026 10:46 am, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> On 2026-04-08 11:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> On 07/04/2026 11:34 am, Michal Orzel wrote:
>>>>> No more regressions for clean guidelines:
>>>>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/morzel/xen/-/pipelines/2433943072
>>>>>
>>>>> Michal Orzel (2):
>>>>>   iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing
>>>>>   iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing
>>>>>
>>>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
>>>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c       | 7 +++----
>>>>>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> If all the violations are fixed, should this test be made blocking?
>>>>
>>>> ~Andrew
>>>
>>> Only if they are also clean on x86; otherwise an arm-specific list of
>>> clean rules should be made (probably better). @Michal what do you 
>>> prefer?
>>>
>>
>> All I'm suggesting is this:
>>
>> xen.git/xen$ git diff
>> diff --git a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml 
>> b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
>> index 4e9af9d60224..f01798c5dee6 100644
>> --- a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
>> +++ b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
>> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ eclair-ARM64-allcode:
>>        CONFIG_STACK_PROTECTOR=y
>>        CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED=y
>>        CONFIG_VM_EVENT=y
>> -  allow_failure: true
>> +  allow_failure: false
>>  
>>  eclair-ARM64-testing:
>>    extends: eclair-ARM64-allcode
>>
>>
>> so regressions become blocking.
>>
>> ~Andrew
> 
> Ah, yes, indeed. I didn't look at the patches but given the diff it 
> makes sense
In general that's a good idea and something I had in mind. That said, we will
likely be expanding the list of enabled features there as soon as one arrives.
What should we do in that case? Make sure that before adding new =y option, the
allcode passes in our Xen fork?

~Michal

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Final series to make Arm MISRA allcode green

[Andrew Cooper]

On 08/04/2026 11:36 am, Orzel, Michal wrote:
>
> On 08/04/2026 12:21, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>> On 2026-04-08 11:51, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 08/04/2026 10:46 am, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>>> On 2026-04-08 11:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>> On 07/04/2026 11:34 am, Michal Orzel wrote:
>>>>>> No more regressions for clean guidelines:
>>>>>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/morzel/xen/-/pipelines/2433943072
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michal Orzel (2):
>>>>>>   iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing
>>>>>>   iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
>>>>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c       | 7 +++----
>>>>>>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>> If all the violations are fixed, should this test be made blocking?
>>>>>
>>>>> ~Andrew
>>>> Only if they are also clean on x86; otherwise an arm-specific list of
>>>> clean rules should be made (probably better). @Michal what do you 
>>>> prefer?
>>>>
>>> All I'm suggesting is this:
>>>
>>> xen.git/xen$ git diff
>>> diff --git a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml 
>>> b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
>>> index 4e9af9d60224..f01798c5dee6 100644
>>> --- a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
>>> +++ b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
>>> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ eclair-ARM64-allcode:
>>>        CONFIG_STACK_PROTECTOR=y
>>>        CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED=y
>>>        CONFIG_VM_EVENT=y
>>> -  allow_failure: true
>>> +  allow_failure: false
>>>  
>>>  eclair-ARM64-testing:
>>>    extends: eclair-ARM64-allcode
>>>
>>>
>>> so regressions become blocking.
>>>
>>> ~Andrew
>> Ah, yes, indeed. I didn't look at the patches but given the diff it 
>> makes sense
> In general that's a good idea and something I had in mind. That said, we will
> likely be expanding the list of enabled features there as soon as one arrives.
> What should we do in that case? Make sure that before adding new =y option, the
> allcode passes in our Xen fork?

New code could be clean as it goes in.  At this point, it's not
interestingly different from "does it compile" as a prerequisite.

~Andrew

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Final series to make Arm MISRA allcode green

[Orzel, Michal]

On 08/04/2026 12:42, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 08/04/2026 11:36 am, Orzel, Michal wrote:
>>
>> On 08/04/2026 12:21, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> On 2026-04-08 11:51, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> On 08/04/2026 10:46 am, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>>>> On 2026-04-08 11:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/04/2026 11:34 am, Michal Orzel wrote:
>>>>>>> No more regressions for clean guidelines:
>>>>>>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/morzel/xen/-/pipelines/2433943072
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michal Orzel (2):
>>>>>>>   iommu/arm: smmu: Fix variable shadowing
>>>>>>>   iommu/arm: ipmmu-vmsa: Fix variable shadowing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/ipmmu-vmsa.c | 6 ++----
>>>>>>>  xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c       | 7 +++----
>>>>>>>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>>> If all the violations are fixed, should this test be made blocking?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ~Andrew
>>>>> Only if they are also clean on x86; otherwise an arm-specific list of
>>>>> clean rules should be made (probably better). @Michal what do you 
>>>>> prefer?
>>>>>
>>>> All I'm suggesting is this:
>>>>
>>>> xen.git/xen$ git diff
>>>> diff --git a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml 
>>>> b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
>>>> index 4e9af9d60224..f01798c5dee6 100644
>>>> --- a/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
>>>> +++ b/automation/gitlab-ci/analyze.yaml
>>>> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ eclair-ARM64-allcode:
>>>>        CONFIG_STACK_PROTECTOR=y
>>>>        CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED=y
>>>>        CONFIG_VM_EVENT=y
>>>> -  allow_failure: true
>>>> +  allow_failure: false
>>>>  
>>>>  eclair-ARM64-testing:
>>>>    extends: eclair-ARM64-allcode
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> so regressions become blocking.
>>>>
>>>> ~Andrew
>>> Ah, yes, indeed. I didn't look at the patches but given the diff it 
>>> makes sense
>> In general that's a good idea and something I had in mind. That said, we will
>> likely be expanding the list of enabled features there as soon as one arrives.
>> What should we do in that case? Make sure that before adding new =y option, the
>> allcode passes in our Xen fork?
> 
> New code could be clean as it goes in.  At this point, it's not
> interestingly different from "does it compile" as a prerequisite.
I can see there are some missing features like static memory/shared memory but
they are tested as part of AMD (it would still be good to have all listed in
allcode). Additionally, we could enable early printk with some dummy values to
cover early_printk.c

~Michal